Indian Navy & Coast Guard for briefing on Bell-Boeing V-22 Osprey

[sancho]

UK Armed Forces Commentary: Giving eyes to the aircraft carriers

Those are older concepts, after the recent live tests reports mentioned up to 3 auxiliary fuel tanks and moving the drogue system to the rear ramp. I always wondered if they could develop CFTs that can be attached to the cabin sides too, to further increase the range or fuel capacity. Anyway, having a proper tanker capability, would counter much of the catapult advantage for fighters.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Best mix for IN

View attachment 190529

Depends if the FGFA can take off from Catapults, if not we shall never see this

 

[sancho]

Depends if the FGFA can take off from Catapults, if not we shall never see this

Why not? The size of IAC 2 will be enough to operate it via sky-jump, just as Su33s and J15s are today at similar sized carriers. So let them take off with minimum fuel and refuel them in air and you don't have any payload problems anymore, but a superior fighter.
The advantage of catapults is not to let fighters with lighter loads take off, but to let heavier aircrafts like an E-2, C-2 or strike aircrafts with proper loads. So we could basically do it like the Russians plan it too and develop a larger STOBAR carrier, with a dedicated catapult system only to operate larger AEW or strike aircrafts like UCAVs =>

1) take IAC1, increase it's size to 65000t
2) add a US catapult to it
3) navalise FGFA
4) buy E-2Ds and V22 MRTTs for AEW and tanker roles
5) develop Aura UCAV for catapult take offs

That's pretty much the most capable mix of carrier, air wing, A2A & A2G, AEW & tanker capabilities, indigenous and foreign capabilities that the Navy could get!

 

[Abingdonboy]

Why not? The size of IAC 2 will be enough to operate it via sky-jump, just as Su33s and J15s are today at similar sized carriers. So let them take off with minimum fuel and refuel them in air and you don't have any payload problems anymore, but a superior fighter.
The advantage of catapults is not to let fighters with lighter loads take off, but to let heavier aircrafts like an E-2, C-2 or strike aircrafts with proper loads. So we could basically do it like the Russians plan it too and develop a larger STOBAR carrier, with a dedicated catapult system only to operate larger AEW or strike aircrafts like UCAVs =>

1) take IAC1, increase it's size to 65000t
2) add a US catapult to it
3) navalise FGFA
4) buy E-2Ds and V22 MRTTs for AEW and tanker roles
5) develop Aura UCAV for catapult take offs

That's pretty much the most capable mix of carrier, air wing, A2A & A2G, AEW & tanker capabilities, indigenous and foreign capabilities that the Navy could get!

In an ideal world perhaps but I doubt this is what the IN NDB is going to come up with, I've seen no indication that they are looking at a CATOBAR/STOBAR mix, in fact they seem deadset on the CATOBAR with EMALS and thus the N-FGFA looks like it will never be....

 

[sancho]

In an ideal world perhaps but I doubt this is what the IN NDB is going to come up with, I've seen no indication that they are looking at a CATOBAR/STOBAR mix, in fact they seem deadset on the CATOBAR with EMALS and thus the N-FGFA looks like it will never be....

Well we don't know what aim they have on the design of IAC2, we only know that they are behind catapults since decades, but that alone doesn't rule out a mixed design. Especially since there are no catapult capable indigenous fighters available so far, nor are they in development and with what we see from ADA / DRDO's AMCA, don't put any hope on them developing a naval version the right way.
We once again have plenty of options, we only have to use them in the right way to get the maximum out of it. If we limit us with pride again, we will make the carrier less capable as well => see INS Vikramaditya with Ka 31 and N-LCA.

 

[sancho]

Why not? The size of IAC 2 will be enough to operate it via sky-jump, just as Su33s and J15s are today at similar sized carriers. So let them take off with minimum fuel and refuel them in air and you don't have any payload problems anymore, but a superior fighter.
The advantage of catapults is not to let fighters with lighter loads take off, but to let heavier aircrafts like an E-2, C-2 or strike aircrafts with proper loads. So we could basically do it like the Russians plan it too and develop a larger STOBAR carrier, with a dedicated catapult system only to operate larger AEW or strike aircrafts like UCAVs =>

1) take IAC1, increase it's size to 65000t
2) add a US catapult to it
3) navalise FGFA
4) buy E-2Ds and V22 MRTTs for AEW and tanker roles
5) develop Aura UCAV for catapult take offs

That's pretty much the most capable mix of carrier, air wing, A2A & A2G, AEW & tanker capabilities, indigenous and foreign capabilities that the Navy could get!

@Abingdonboy

Russian future carrier:

Pretty much what I suggested in my ealier post, but what if we could get catapult capable AEW aircrafts from Russia instead of the E-2D or V22, with the possibility to add a DRDO radar system? Own radar with full operational freedom + a comparable platform as the E-2, perfect mix!

 

[Abingdonboy]

@Abingdonboy

Russian future carrier:
View attachment 192293
View attachment 192294


Pretty much what I suggested in my ealier post, but what if we could get catapult capable AEW aircrafts from Russia instead of the E-2D or V22, with the possibility to add a DRDO radar system? Own radar with full operational freedom + a comparable platform as the E-2, perfect mix!

I've seen this design before and whilst it would be good for India because then the N-FGFA would be able to become a reality BUT just because something is a good idea doesn't mean it is going to happen, does it? Have you got any reason to think the NDB is designing a hybrid carrier like this? Everything (from clearance of EMALS to the IN's briefing on the E-2D) points to the IAC-2 and beyond being full CATOBAR carriers.

+ I'm still not sold on the hybrid idea anyway, the ski ramp assisted take-off would still impose the same inherent shortcomings on the FGFAs (HUGE planes) i.e. a tradeoff between weapons and fuel, yes this can be lessoned to an extent by IFR from buddy-buddy refuelling or a tanker but the inherent tradeoff remains.

To the point about a Russian E-2 body equivalent, there's nothing I've seen to indicate the Russians are working on this and even if they were it would take how long to get it into service? Besides, India needs to diversify away from Russia, making their Carriers all Russian dependant is a bad idea IMHO.

 

[sancho]

I've seen this design before and whilst it would be good for India because then the N-FGFA would be able to become a reality BUT just because something is a good idea doesn't mean it is going to happen, does it? Have you got any reason to think the NDB is designing a hybrid carrier like this? Everything (from clearance of EMALS to the IN's briefing on the E-2D) points to the IAC-2 and beyond being full CATOBAR carriers.

That still is a CATOBAR carrier, because it has catapults and arrested landing! Nothing would stop us from using, EMALS, F18SH, or E-2D next to an N-FGFA on such a carrier. We have to think out of the box to get the maximum advantages and not only look to others and aim on having the same.

+ I'm still not sold on the hybrid idea anyway, the ski ramp assisted take-off would still impose the same inherent shortcomings on the FGFAs (HUGE planes) i.e. a tradeoff between weapons and fuel, yes this can be lessoned to an extent by IFR from buddy-buddy refuelling or a tanker but the inherent tradeoff remains.

It's not like an F18SH would not be refuelled after take off especially if heading for long range missions. IFR is a common mission for carrier fighters, because they have to use the fighter far away from the actual target, or away from regions where larger tankers could support them. And refuelling an N-FGFA after take off, is a far far lower trade off than operating F18SHs and 35Cs with limited performance and operational restrictions, you can't deny that right?

To the point about a Russian E-2 body equivalent, there's nothing I've seen to indicate the Russians are working on this and even if they were it would take how long to get it into service?

Yakovlev Yak-44 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Check this too:
Як-44

 

[Abingdonboy]

And refuelling an N-FGFA after take off, is a far far lower trade off than operating F18SHs and 35Cs with limited performance and operational restrictions, you can't deny that right?

This is true of course.

We have to think out of the box to get the maximum advantages and not only look to others and aim on having the same.

I am not disagreeing with your point that the hybrid carrier is ideal for India as the N-FGFA is by FAR the most capable carrier fighter that will be in service for the next 20+ years HOWEVER I am being pragmatic. Like I said, there's nothing to indicate the NDB are looking at this hybrid carrier is there?There could be a whole host of practical reasons why such a design is not possible for the IN. And we also don't know if the EMALS comes with conditions to preclude just this sort of hybrid.

Yakovlev Yak-44 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Check this too:
Як-44

Hmmm very interesting indeed, wasn't aware of such a bird existing. But was cancelled before she even flew and that too over 35 years ago, who knows if this project is a) viable and b) able to be revived (and do we want to do this on the IN's dime?).


I've been called a pessimist but I prefer to think of myself as a pragmatist sir

 

[sancho]

Hmmm very interesting indeed, wasn't aware of such a bird existing. But was cancelled before she even flew and that too over 35 years ago, who knows if this project is a) viable and b) able to be revived (and do we want to do this on the IN's dime?).

It ended just as the first hybrid carrier (Soviet aircraft carrier Ulyanovsk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) with the fall of the Soviet Union, otherwise we would see both operational today. The plans and concepts for the future Russian carriers are just based on what they had developed back then, with the addtionan of modern aircrafts techs and systems of course. They aim on using Mig 29Ks, Ka ASW helicopters, N-Pak Fa, Mig Scat UCAVs and as seen on the concepts follow developments of the Yak 44 AEW. We also know that they have started EMALS development too and that they obviously will go for a nuclear propulsion for the carrier. The only part that actually needs new development from scratch is the Mig Scat, the rest is a piece of cake for them.

I've been called a pessimist but I prefer to think of myself as a pragmatist sir

And you are talking to the guy that keeps saying an LCA with foreign radar and engine, a Mig 29K with indigenous radar and engine, or the Tank Ex would be good ideas. Couldn't be more pragmatic than that right?

And the same is the case here. As soon as IAC 1 will be ready, we can say we have mastered that STOBAR carrier design, we even develop indigenous carrier fighters exactly for that type of carriers, so why should we waste all this experience, only because the US designs carriers with catapults only? Why should we limit ourselfs like that?

And as you said yourself, there is hardly a better NG carrier fighter than an N-FGFA, which is basically screaming take the N-LCA tech demo know how and implement it in me!!!

It's great that the US finally seems to be ready to give us catapults, but that doesn't mean we have to make us dependent on them, their carrier designs and aircrafts now. We have to get the best from them, as well as the Russians and implement everything in the best possible manner to the what we already have developed on our own!

=> indigenous naval vessels => indigenous STOBAR carriers => indigenous STOBAR carrier fighter => indigenous hybrid carrier with NG indigenous aircrafts (N-FGFA, N-AURA, N-DRDO AWACS)